Perhaps I can shed some light on this. Substantial holders are a seperate heading because anyone who holds more than 5% needs to be clearly identified under Corps Act. As you might guess there is more scrutiny for who is identified as a substantial holder than a top 20 holder. This can sometimes result in differences (basically because of nominees/trustees etc). Without trying to pick apart Nick's legal structure it is safe to say JP Morgan is him because no one else has over 5%.
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- TV2
- Research
Research, page-831
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 3,466 more messages in this thread...
This thread is closed.
You may not reply to this discussion at this time.
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)